Section 6 of IEA : Section 6: Relevancy of facts forming part of same transaction.

Explanation using Example

Example 1:

A is accused of robbing a bank in Mumbai. During the robbery, A's accomplice, B, was seen outside the bank acting as a lookout. After the robbery, A and B were seen together at a nearby café discussing the robbery and dividing the stolen money. Even though the conversation at the café happened after the robbery, it is relevant to the case because it forms part of the same transaction.

Example 2:

C is accused of assaulting D in a public park in Delhi. Witnesses saw C and D arguing loudly before the assault. After the assault, C was seen running away from the park and disposing of a weapon in a nearby trash bin. The argument before the assault and C's actions after the assault are relevant facts because they are connected to the same transaction of the assault.

Example 3:

E is accused of committing fraud by forging documents to obtain a loan from a bank in Chennai. During the investigation, it is discovered that E had several meetings with bank officials and submitted multiple forged documents over a period of time. Each meeting and submission of documents, even if they occurred at different times, are relevant facts because they form part of the same transaction of committing fraud.

Example 4:

F is accused of smuggling contraband goods into India through the port of Kolkata. The contraband was transported through various cities before reaching its final destination. Each stage of the transportation, including the loading of goods at the port, the transfer to different vehicles, and the final delivery, are relevant facts because they are part of the same transaction of smuggling.

Example 5:

G is accused of defaming H by publishing a defamatory article in a newspaper in Bangalore. The article was part of a series of publications that included several letters and emails exchanged between G and the newspaper editor discussing the defamatory content. These letters and emails, even if they do not contain the defamatory statements themselves, are relevant facts because they form part of the same transaction of defamation.